Skip to main content

Table 4 Extract of results from survey of Cochrane Review Group staff

From: Evaluation of the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials: focus groups, online survey, proposed recommendations and their implementation

Survey questions n (%)
Respondent’s role in the CRG (Q1)  
    Managing editor 19 (33)
    Coordinating editor 11 (19)
    Other editor 11 (19)
    Trial search coordinator/information specialist 2 (3)
    Other 15 (26)
CRG policy regarding RoB assessments for new reviews (Q2)  
    All new reviews must include RoB assessment 45 (78)
    Recommended, but not compulsory 9 (16)
    No clear policy or not sure 4 (7)
CRG policy regarding RoB assessments for updated reviews (Q3)  
    All updated reviews must include RoB assessment 28 (48)
      Only for newly included studies (Q3a) 3
      Both newly and previously included studies (Q3a) 10
    Recommended, but not compulsory 22 (38)
      Only for newly included studies (Q3a) 0
      Both newly and previously included studies (Q3a) 14
    No clear policy or not sure 8 (14)
CRG staff verify assessments completed by their authors (Q4) 31 (53)
CRG recommend authors use pilot testing (Q5) 20 (35)
CRG recommend a modified RoB tool for randomized studies (Q7) 13 (23)
CRG recommend authors use RoB tool for non-randomized studies (Q6) 16 (28)
    CRG recommend a modified tool for non-randomized studies (Q6a) 11
CRG recommend authors incorporate RoB in conclusion by: (Q9)a  
    Conducting sensitivity analysis by RoB judgement 33 (57)
    Including a narrative summary within interpretation of results 24 (41)
    No specific recommendation 15 (26)
CRG recommend use of quotes to support RoB judgements (Q10) 34 (57)
RoB tool is better than previous Cochrane practice (Q12) 55 (95)
Features respondents most liked (Q13)a  
    Ability to provide information (for example quotes) 48 (83)
    Standardized approach 46 (79)
Features respondents least liked (Q14)a  
    Judgement options (Yes/No/Unclear) confusing 24 (41)
    Time taken to complete 20 (34)
Authors encounter problems with assessing sequence generation (Q16) 17 (29)
Authors encounter problems with assessing allocation concealment (Q17) 29 (50)
Authors encounter problems with assessing blinding (Q18) 33 (59)
Authors encounter problems with assessing incomplete outcome data (Q19) 41 (72)
Authors encounter problems with assessing selective outcome reporting (Q20) 38 (67)
Authors encounter problems with assessing ‘other bias’ (Q21) 32 (56)
Other bias domain is helpful (Q22) 27 (47)
CRG recommend standard ‘other sources of bias’ (Q23) 10 (17)
  1. Based on 58 respondents, Cochrane Review Group staff. Only the most frequent responses shown in the table, and some response options have been grouped to fewer categories. Not all respondents answered each question. Question numbers refer to the survey question in Additional file1: Appendix 3. For full details of questions and responses, see Additional file1: Appendix 3. aRespondents were allowed to select multiple answers for this question. CRG, Cochrane Review Group; RoB, risk of bias.